* Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> But face it, you can argue until you're blue in the face,
That is not a technical argument though - and i considered and
answered every valid technical argument made by you and Thomas.
You were either not able to or not willing to counter them.
> [...] but both tglx and I will NAK any and all patches that extend
> perf/ftrace beyond the passive observing role.
The thing is, perf is *already* well beyond the 'passive observer'
role: we already generate lots of 'action' in response to events. We
generate notification signals, we write events - all of which can
(and does) modify program behavior.
So what's your point? There's no "passive observer" role really -
it's apparently just that you dislike this use of instrumentation
while you approve of other uses.
Thanks,
Ingo
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
